About your Search

20130201
20130228
Search Results 0 to 14 of about 15 (some duplicates have been removed)
chuck hagel who has been nominated to be secretary of defense has been proposing. he has said so many things against us even as a nation being nuclear armed and ready, that it is very disturbing to people all across the country. bill: if you think that, do you think we've lost the argument with iran over its nuclear program? is that time passed? >> well, i think that the time has passed. they now view it as, us versus them. sanctions have worked to lower the value of their currency. sanctions have had an impact on people through throughout the country of iran. but i don't believe they have had the impact that has been desired against the iranian government. bill: why are we sitting down and talking again? what's the expectation from something like this? >> i think very little would be expected. i would expect the iranians to have their arms folded in front of their chest and sitting there, perhaps, listening, but basically they're continuing to run out the clock. they may even talk a little bit about wanting to negotiate but they have no interest in, my opinion, bill, in negotiating o
-cents a share. bill: the stage is set for a fight over chuck hagel. senate democrats will hold a straight up or down vote on his confirmation friday in an attempt to break a republican filibuster, meaning that hagel will need 60 votes, five of them from republicans now, many of whom who threatened to block his confirmation. here is lindsey graham as to why republicans are not sold on hagel. >> the debate on chuck hagel is not over. it has not been serious, we don't have the information we need and i am going to fight the idea of jamming somebody through until we get answers about what the president did personally when it came to the benghazi debacle. democrats had no problem doing that with bush and quite frankly they did the country a service by probing into failure. bill: what is going to happen now, bret baier is anchor of special ror. how d special report? how are you doing. >> reporter: good morning, bill. bill: harry reid is talking about this potentially on the floor of the senate. if there is news we'll bring it to our viewers. graham says the debate is not over, it has
. on their face i don't expect the senate to reject mr. brennan for cia chief, and despite mr. hagel's troubles in the confirmation hearing, i don't expect he will be blocked as a matter of substance or his performance in the hearings. but it is true that if a couple of senators decide to hold things up because they want more answers, it gives the administration a choice. it can either go to bat against the republicans and say they're being unreasonable, they're being political, they need to back down, or they could make a decision we just want to get this thing through, let's try to give them enough information to satisfy them and get it over with. jon: a mouthpiece for the administration in this situation said these are critical national security positions, and individual members -- meaning senators -- shouldn't play politics with their nominations. but isn't that what happens at every nomination, the senators trot out their list of wants, you know, information wise from the administration and use some leverage? >> yes, i mean -- well, jon, that's what advise and consent ultimately means. it
's blocking of further consideration of the nomination of chuck hagel to be the next secretary of defense. we'll be back here in chicago as soon as the president arrives. >> good morning, thanks for talking with us. >> how unusual is it to have the president's pick blocked at this stage of the game? guest: it is very unusual. the senator has never filibustered the president's nomination for the defense secretary. the most bizarre thing, i think, is probably the most frustrating for the people watching this, particularly outside of washington, is that you know, former senator hagel is former republican senator, mind you. the reason why it was defeated because the majority leader harry reid switched his vote to no so he could bring the vote back up again after the senate comes back from recease. a lot of republican senators were saying that they did not want this choice filibustered. even if they wanted to vote no on his nomination he at least deserves an up down vote in order to be approved. the republicans decided to use this vote as a way to extract more information from the white house on i
your experience in research, what do you think of the reaction against chuck hagel's being secretary of defense, a man whose clearly reluctant to send soldiers into harm's way having been there himself. >> the question was about the former senator chuck hagel, a man with two purple hearts, shrapnel in his test, and all the controversy over him. without weighing in on him per se. i like the idea of people who served in uniform having a say in policy decisions in which men in uniform and women in uniform are sent into harm's way, as a general thought. i don't have a position on whether he should be secretary of defense. i do think it's interesting, and the last three or four weeks i've wished my show was up and running so we could talk about this at some length, but i think it's interesting, john kerry, chuck hagel, two men with, i think, five purple hearts between them, and both of them, although, they votedded for iraq and afghanistan, can't say they are completely doves, although, maybe john kerry didn't vote for iraq. i can't keep it straight, but in any case, what it does, and we
of defense, chuck hagel. i am confident and i've expressed that confidence publicly that the men and women of the department of defense will have the kind of advocate that they need as the nation emerges for more than a decade of war. lastly, i'm honored to be here, as i said, as a catholic and as a proud graduate of another just what institution, santa clara university. my time in the universities undergraduate and law school, in many ways shaped the rest of my life, after this education will shape the rest of your lives. i remain deeply thankful to the jesuits for the outstanding education that i received. having gone through seven years of philosophy and syllogisms and theology and canon law, i have been blessed by all the grace and skepticism that jesse woods can give. more importantly, i've been shaped by what i believe is their pragmatic approach, the life, faith and the issues in general. it was bad education and my catholic upbringing -- it was bad education and my catholic education, particularly the son of italian immigrants, that instilled in me the very core principles and valu
. senator hagel. later today i'm going to be talking to john brennan. can you give a brief assessment of the two gentle and the capability and the readiness to assume the positions? >> yes, certainly. obviously that's something that the committees now have the opportunity evaluate. but in my view, both of them are outstanding individuals that have a great deal of experience and capability to be able to perform in an outstanding fashion in each of their jobs. senator hagel is someone who, you know, served in the military, worked up here on the hill. understand the issues that are involve there had. i think can be a very effective leader at the pentagon. john brennan is somebody i worked with the at the director of cia and continued to work with in this capacity. i found him to be responsible about how we can effectively conduct operations again al qaeda and against those that would attack this country. he is -- as somebody said, a straight shooter. somebody who, you know, gives you his best opinion, he doesn't play games. he is somebody who i think, you know, can honestly represent the
is the nomination of chuck hagel to be the next secretary of defense. you have been very strongly, not against him, per se, but you want more information about him. are you satisfied? >> i think he's an out liar when it comes to our possibly regarding iran and israel. you'll find a hard time finding anyone more antagonistic toward israel on the way he votes. >> doesn't the president have the right to pick his own defense secretary? >> yes. the question is, will we vote for cloture. i haven't found anything that will make it an extraordinary circumstance to vote against cloture. >> so you're going to allow that final vote to go through. but you won't vote to support him? >> that's the way it looks right now, as of about whatever time it is, i intend to vote for cloture, and he's become the secretary of defense, and if i can help him, i will. >> you're vote for cloture. just to explain to our viewers, you will not allow a filibuster to go through. he will need 51 votes as opposed to 60. >> that's right. >> a lot to sgoing on on capito hill. good to see you. >> other news we have been following. that
hagel is who served in the military and worked up here on the hill and understands the issues involved there and can be a very effective leader at the pentagon. john brennan is somebody i worked with as director of the c.i.a. and continue to work with in this capacity. and i always found him to be very responsible about how we can effectively conduct operations against al qaeda and against those that would attack this country. he is somebody a straight shooter, somebody who gives you his best opinion. he doesn't play games. he's someone who i think can really honestly represent the best protection of this country in that job. >> thank you very much. and i want to thank you for your forth right comments today about the sequester. ironically as what you said in your statement, it appears the greatest threat to the united states security is the united states congress. thank you, mr. secretary. >> thank you. let me mention this, after senator nelson, the first round will be over. there may be a number of us who may want a few minutes on the second round and you two witnesses have been here
quick questions. thank you for your service and leadership. one, do you support or oppose chuck hagel as secretary of defense? to, what is your violation of thomas ricks criticism of american generals since world war ii except for you and general petraeus? [laughter] >> altaic the second verse. it's painful to read about generals being criticized because a lot of it's correct. you see it and say that's me, i'm guilty of that. we had shortcomings of not being strategically enough minded. you know, you get focused on your job, your tactical part of the mission and not digging the big strategic problem you're trying to solve. one is not firing enough people. we don't fire and not generals. .. you know, from the senate, his time in vietnam is useful because it gives you a context. the most important thing is if he and president obama are a good team, that is what matters. though much worry about his policy positions one way or another because he will be a policy maker. the president's policies will go but the fact that the field that they can be a good team, to me that is the important th
hagel. and since we are now just weeks away from the automatic cuts to federal spending, including defense, let me say this -- there is no reason, no reason for that to happen, putting our fiscal house in order calls for a balanced approach, not massive indiscriminate cuts that could have a severe impact on our military preparedness. so here today for the sake of our prosperity, for the sake of all these men and women in uniform, and all their brothers and sisters in uniform that they represent, now is the time to act, for democrats and republicans to come together in the same spirit that leon panetta always brought to public service, solving problems, not trying to score points, doing right for the country, not for any particular political agenda. sustaining our economic recovery, balancing budgets, leon knows something about it, but also maintaining the finest military in history. leon, this too will be part of your legacy, for no one has raised their voices firmly or as forcefully on behalf of our trips as you have. you have served with integrity and decency, and grace. you are
Search Results 0 to 14 of about 15 (some duplicates have been removed)